A sad day, he was a good man.
a good man would have taken the bribes
buh bye, Duke
A sad day, he was a good man.
Maybe once, many moons ago, but not anymore:
Cunningham answered "yes, Your Honor" when asked by U.S. District Judge Larry Burns if he had accepted bribes from someone in exchange for his performance of official duties.
He admitted to taking bribes, and resigned. He is NOT a good man by any definition that matters to the general public. He might be a good student, or a good tennis player, but he is not a good man.
To quote a line, he still is a good man.
He made some bad decisions, but he's admitted his failures and is willing to take the consequences and make amends as best he can.
We all make mistakes - some of us are in positions to make bigger mistakes than others.
Not anymore.
What's sad is that he has slimed his colleagues, Party, principles and positions.
He deserves stern consequences-- he has earned them.
To say "he was a good man" is inappropriately vague. Better to say, "It is a shame that his principled stances and services to his constituents will now forever be shadowed by his admitted corruption. Let us be very clear and separate his good work from his bad deeds. For those, he will not be missed."
Well, he screwed us patriots good, anyways.
No, he's a sleazy, greedy pile of crap who only resigned when he knew he was obviously going down - he knew he was guilty all along but wanted to keep his parasitic position "serving the public" when he knew he was really a worthless felon.
Standard Republican Big Government politician, just like democRat Big Government politicians. Yet the Repulicans were all in a lather to get him reelected.
Another political lifer, loser, hack.
==================================
He took bribes in office and conspired to avoid paying taxes...you might want to set your threshold definition of 'a good man' a bit higher.
Apparently not.
I know that this was probably dragged up by liberals (while they continued looking the other way on Richard Gephardt's strange accounting discrepanies) but we conservatives must stand up for honesty and demand our elected officials obey the law.
"...he was a good man"
Certainly he did good things for the country at a point in the past.
But at this point he is in fact a crook. Please don't even attempt to put lipstick on something grunting and rooting in the public trough.
..."was" being the operative term...
But a dishonest one. I don't care if he is a republican, democrat, or what have you, if he committed a crime, let him do the time. I am certain you and I would be judged on the crime, so let him be also.
No, he was a corrupt, immoral sack of #*$% who just took positions you like. That does not make him a "good man."
>>A sad day, he was a good man.<<
No doubt he was, but probably no more corrupt than any run-of-the-mill pol. The entire system is rotting from the inside out. The BIG headline story would feature a politician that WASN'T corrupt to the core.
They ALL have to go at the first opportunity.
He probably was, and everyone deserves a little understanding.
But, when it comes out in public stand up and take your medicine.
Apparently not, but that is what he wanted you to think.
This kind of corruption wouldn't happen if we paid our congressmembers $1 million a year. Well, maybe it still would.
The key word here is was. Duke is yet another example that one can serve honorably in the military, yet wind up being a scumbag in civilian life... IIRC, wasn't he the first American ace in the Viet Nam war, and wasn't he one of the first instructors at "Top Gun?"
Funny thing about the difference between pubbies and dems, though... Pubbies have a tendancy to fess up, once they're caught, and take what they've got coming. Dems? Well, they'll deny, fight, kick, scratch, and bite. And then they'll say that it was all a bunch of lies.
Yup, the dems will get lots of mileage out of this one.
Mark